Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Let's talk a little bit about Obama's position on presidential pardons. Back in 2008 he says he will not abuse his power of pardon, and sticks with that until now. I'm not yet clear on the numbers but I hear he is pardoning between 500 and 100,000 criminals and illegal aliens. I am waiting for the real tally on that but it doesn't look good for him to flip flop on this issue. Presidents should not abuse the power of pardon, Obama has said that, had the opportunity to set a good example and perhaps set a new trend of making this unacceptable in the future. He has really disappointed me on this, for I had hoped he would be good to his word. He lied, and I bet he is very busy today with his pen.
.
Turns out Obama granted very few pardons. What he did grant were commutations. The person is still considered guilty, but their sentence is reduced. I support that 100%. Almost all of these people were in for drug-related crimes. Some had life sentences, which is ridiculous.
Well, Obama gave out over 1700 commutations, an all time record if you look at just the raw numbers. But he received 4x the number of applications than the previous administration, the drug laws push the number of applicants up. Since his number of actual pardons (212) are not particularly high and not littered with high profile cases that scream corruption (clinton), I will not say this adds much to the negative on his record. Plus I did notice as a percentage of total applications, Nixon gave out more pardons than Obama, which kinda shuts me down on this matter. I did think it was interesting that both HW and GW Bush had the lowest number of pardons by far, no matter how you calculate it, than any of the others in modern history.
However, to some unfortunate parent that lost their kid to an overdose of heroin, because the streets are flooded with the stuff, they might not look upon all those drug commutations as being anything but a total failure. Back in the 70's heroin was a $400 a day habit that only the rich could indulge in, supplies on the streets were tight, and prescriptions from a doctor for any opiate was also very tight. I think we have gone in the wrong direction, Amsterdam had to reverse this policy of decriminalizing hard drugs like heroin, because it spreads everywhere if you don't crack down on supply. Read up on Chinese history to see how bad it can get, if you make it real cheap and available everywhere.
... I did think it was interesting that both HW and GW Bush had the lowest number of pardons by far, no matter how you calculate it, than any of the others in modern history....
W Bush was heavily lobbied by Dick Cheney to pardon Scooter Libby, but W declined to do so. He said something along the lines that he wanted to respect the decision of the jury, which I think showed commendable integrity. He did give Libby a commutation.
W Bush was heavily lobbied by Dick Cheney to pardon Scooter Libby, but W declined to do so. He said something along the lines that he wanted to respect the decision of the jury, which I think showed commendable integrity. He did give Libby a commutation.
George W Bush also refused to commute the sentence of convicted spy Jonathan Pollard, who was paroled in November 2015 after serving 30 years of a life sentence.
W Bush was heavily lobbied by Dick Cheney to pardon Scooter Libby, but W declined to do so. He said something along the lines that he wanted to respect the decision of the jury, which I think showed commendable integrity. He did give Libby a commutation.
Yes, that reminded me of the pressure he was under to give a pardon to a woman murderess, when he was governor of Texas. Repentant and claiming to have found Jesus, the woman had gained some public sympathy to have her death sentence reduced to life in prison. GW Bush did not falter, can't remember if they gassed her or she got a lethal injection, but no pardon. I admire his strength. But I gave him a low grade not only for Iraq, but for being the worst speaker of all the presidents I can remember, and probably the worst speaker ever to hold the oval office.
I wanted to elaborate a little more on Andrew Johnson, I gave him a B+ which might have been a touch generous but not by much. He was an incredible man that had his foot in both doors, and he reminds me a bit of George Wallace, a man walking a fine line, from the past to the future. At the beginning of the Civil War, the south hated him for not resigning his seat and staying with the union. He helped recruit 20K black soldiers to fight for the union. He was a democrat, not a republican. The North (of course) liked him during this period and so did Mr. Lincoln, whom wanted him on the ticket for VP in 1864.
After the end of the war, when Lincoln dies and he becomes president, Andrew Johnson becomes hated by the northern republicans, and loved by the southern democrats. Johnson is a southern democrat from Tennessee, and president of the US. What did you expect from him? Lincoln wanted the re-entry of the south into the union to go smoothly, and did not want his party to punish the south and rub salt into the wounds. It takes time to adjust when you lose a war and for the south, Andrew Johnson was the only voice they had (that mattered) in government. So now the south loves him, and the north hates him.
Johnson has difficulties with his Sec of War Edwin Stanton, a staunch republican, and wants to remove him from office. At this point, the republicans cook up the "Tenure of Office Act" to strip powers from the president, in his ability to fire anyone in the cabinet without congressional approval (with Stanton in mind). This amendment was poorly worded and murky, Johnson had every right to test it, and see if the courts would uphold this reduction of presidential powers. Johnson barely squeaked thru by one vote in the impeachment hearings. Later, when Grant became president, congress changes the Tenure of Office Act to allow the new republican president the power to fire cabinet officials. Eventually they scrap the Tenure of Office Act in the 1880's under Grover Cleveland, whom wants to clean out corruption and can't do it without removal of this law.
Andrew Johnson gave the south hope when there was none, they were at the mercy of the north after Lincoln was shot, and lucky for them, Johnson was making it palatable for them to rejoin the union. Many states had rejoined the union under his term with little or no rebellion. It could have turned into gorilla warfare and dragged on and on, but for Johnson's merciful governance and patience. He was under enormous pressure and did not crack. In many ways, I think he was the real preserver of the union. All the things the republicans wanted to do, eventually got done under Grant. By then the south was prepared for the changes to come under his administration, with thoughts of rebellion now distant. Johnson the once poverty stricken tailor, was given a hero's welcome upon his return to his hometown of Greeneville TN. He was elected senator in 1875 just a few months before he died, the only president to ever return to the Senate.
Yes, that reminded me of the pressure he was under to give a pardon to a woman murderess, when he was governor of Texas. Repentant and claiming to have found Jesus, the woman had gained some public sympathy to have her death sentence reduced to life in prison. GW Bush did not falter, can't remember if they gassed her or she got a lethal injection, but no pardon. I admire his strength. But I gave him a low grade not only for Iraq, but for being the worst speaker of all the presidents I can remember, and probably the worst speaker ever to hold the oval office.
I wanted to elaborate a little more on Andrew Johnson, I gave him a B+ which might have been a touch generous but not by much. He was an incredible man that had his foot in both doors, and he reminds me a bit of George Wallace, a man walking a fine line, from the past to the future. At the beginning of the Civil War, the south hated him for not resigning his seat and staying with the union. He helped recruit 20K black soldiers to fight for the union. He was a democrat, not a republican. The North (of course) liked him during this period and so did Mr. Lincoln, whom wanted him on the ticket for VP in 1864.
After the end of the war, when Lincoln dies and he becomes president, Andrew Johnson becomes hated by the northern republicans, and loved by the southern democrats. Johnson is a southern democrat from Tennessee, and president of the US. What did you expect from him? Lincoln wanted the re-entry of the south into the union to go smoothly, and did not want his party to punish the south and rub salt into the wounds. It takes time to adjust when you lose a war and for the south, Andrew Johnson was the only voice they had (that mattered) in government. So now the south loves him, and the north hates him.
Johnson has difficulties with his Sec of War Edwin Stanton, a staunch republican, and wants to remove him from office. At this point, the republicans cook up the "Tenure of Office Act" to strip powers from the president, in his ability to fire anyone in the cabinet without congressional approval (with Stanton in mind). This amendment was poorly worded and murky, Johnson had every right to test it, and see if the courts would uphold this reduction of presidential powers. Johnson barely squeaked thru by one vote in the impeachment hearings. Later, when Grant became president, congress changes the Tenure of Office Act to allow the new republican president the power to fire cabinet officials. Eventually they scrap the Tenure of Office Act in the 1880's under Grover Cleveland, whom wants to clean out corruption and can't do it without removal of this law.
Andrew Johnson gave the south hope when there was none, they were at the mercy of the north after Lincoln was shot, and lucky for them, Johnson was making it palatable for them to rejoin the union. Many states had rejoined the union under his term with little or no rebellion. It could have turned into gorilla warfare and dragged on and on, but for Johnson's merciful governance and patience. He was under enormous pressure and did not crack. In many ways, I think he was the real preserver of the union. All the things the republicans wanted to do, eventually got done under Grant. By then the south was prepared for the changes to come under his administration, with thoughts of rebellion now distant. Johnson the once poverty stricken tailor, was given a hero's welcome upon his return to his hometown of Greeneville TN. He was elected senator in 1875 just a few months before he died, the only president to ever return to the Senate.
Agree on Andrew Johnson. He was a profile in courage
George Washington : A (grade enhanced by role in setup of country)
John Adams: B+ (grade enhanced by establishment of tradition of peaceful transfer of power)
Thomas Jefferson: B- (grade lowered by Embargo Act and personal finance)
James Madison: C (disastrous wartime President, pressed war of solely sectional influence)
James Monroe: B-
John Quincy Adams: C-
Andrew Jackson: B (first President not showing patrician influence)
Martin Van Buren: C-
William Henry Harrison: N/A (died after 30 days)
John Tyler: D (tumultuous management of Cabinet and participation in VA secession efforts)
James K. Polk: A
Zachary Taylor: C+
Millard Fillmore: C- (lack of leadership in Compromise of 1850)
Franklin Pierce: F
James Buchanan: F
Abraham Lincoln: A+
Andrew Johnson: C+ (underrated, and did symbolize reunification, at least of Tennessee)
Ulysses S. Grant: C+
Rutherford B. Hayes: C+
James A. Garfield: N/A (assassinated too soon into his term)
Chester A. Arthur: B- (signed Civil Service)
Grover Cleveland (1st term): B
Benjamin Harrison: C+
Grover Cleveland (2nd term): B-
William McKinley: B-
Theodore Roosevelt: A+
William Howard Taft: C-
Woodrow Wilson: C (League of Nations disastrous idea)
Warren G. Harding: C
Calvin Coolidge: C
Franklin D. Roosevelt: F (no moral authority on Axis conduct, cooperated in massacre of Jews)
Harry S Truman: A (made gutsy decisions on Hiroshima, integrating army, recognizing Israel)
Dwight D. Eisenhower: D+ (how many ways to spell appeasement)
John F.Kennedy: B- (glamour boy, didn’t really do much, slid towards appeasement after brave talk)
Lyndon B. Johnson: C
Richard M. Nixon: F
Gerald R. Ford: B
Jimmy Carter: F
Ronald W. Reagan: A (destroyed Iron Curtain without firing a shot)
George H.W. Bush: C+
William J. Clinton: B
George W. Bush: B
Barack H. Obama: D- (delivered divisive rather than post-racial government)
I disagreed strongly with OP on FDR, Eisenhower, Reagan and GWB.
Yes, that reminded me of the pressure he was under to give a pardon to a woman murderess, when he was governor of Texas. Repentant and claiming to have found Jesus, the woman had gained some public sympathy to have her death sentence reduced to life in prison. GW Bush did not falter, can't remember if they gassed her or she got a lethal injection, but no pardon. I admire his strength. But I gave him a low grade not only for Iraq, but for being the worst speaker of all the presidents I can remember, and probably the worst speaker ever to hold the oval office.
I think you are speaking of Karla Faye Tucker. I am not even certain he had the authority to change her sentence to life imprisonment, but was given plenty of grief for not doing it. I'll always have a fondness for him, as I think he got one of the crappiest deals (if not the crappiest) in Presidential history.
But I gave him a low grade not only for Iraq, but for being the worst speaker of all the presidents I can remember, and probably the worst speaker ever to hold the oval office.
I don't think the U.S. or any Western power has ever fought Muslims effectively. With one exception, of course, Israel. And Israel gets no end of grief for its effectively.
The U.S. faced rather large casualties fighting Muslim in the Philippines from 1898 till we threw in the towel in 1944. The Netherlands threw in the towel on Indonesia. The list goes on. They fight with little regard for human life, even their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford
I wanted to elaborate a little more on Andrew Johnson, I gave him a B+ which might have been a touch generous but not by much. He was an incredible man that had his foot in both doors, and he reminds me a bit of George Wallace, a man walking a fine line, from the past to the future. At the beginning of the Civil War, the south hated him for not resigning his seat and staying with the union. He helped recruit 20K black soldiers to fight for the union. He was a democrat, not a republican. The North (of course) liked him during this period and so did Mr. Lincoln, whom wanted him on the ticket for VP in 1864.
After the end of the war, when Lincoln dies and he becomes president, Andrew Johnson becomes hated by the northern republicans, and loved by the southern democrats. Johnson is a southern democrat from Tennessee, and president of the US. What did you expect from him? Lincoln wanted the re-entry of the south into the union to go smoothly, and did not want his party to punish the south and rub salt into the wounds. It takes time to adjust when you lose a war and for the south, Andrew Johnson was the only voice they had (that mattered) in government. So now the south loves him, and the north hates him.
Johnson has difficulties with his Sec of War Edwin Stanton, a staunch republican, and wants to remove him from office. At this point, the republicans cook up the "Tenure of Office Act" to strip powers from the president, in his ability to fire anyone in the cabinet without congressional approval (with Stanton in mind). This amendment was poorly worded and murky, Johnson had every right to test it, and see if the courts would uphold this reduction of presidential powers. Johnson barely squeaked thru by one vote in the impeachment hearings. Later, when Grant became president, congress changes the Tenure of Office Act to allow the new republican president the power to fire cabinet officials. Eventually they scrap the Tenure of Office Act in the 1880's under Grover Cleveland, whom wants to clean out corruption and can't do it without removal of this law.
Andrew Johnson gave the south hope when there was none, they were at the mercy of the north after Lincoln was shot, and lucky for them, Johnson was making it palatable for them to rejoin the union. Many states had rejoined the union under his term with little or no rebellion. It could have turned into gorilla warfare and dragged on and on, but for Johnson's merciful governance and patience. He was under enormous pressure and did not crack.
So far we agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford
In many ways, I think he was the real preserver of the union.
This may be pushing it. Lincoln had something to do with it also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford
All the things the republicans wanted to do, eventually got done under Grant. By then the south was prepared for the changes to come under his administration, with thoughts of rebellion now distant. Johnson the once poverty stricken tailor, was given a hero's welcome upon his return to his hometown of Greeneville TN. He was elected senator in 1875 just a few months before he died, the only president to ever return to the Senate.
I think you are speaking of Karla Faye Tucker. I am not even certain he had the authority to change her sentence to life imprisonment, but was given plenty of grief for not doing it. I'll always have a fondness for him, as I think he got one of the crappiest deals (if not the crappiest) in Presidential history.
The best thing I can say about George W. Bush was that he had manners and personal qualities that make him somewhat likable.
Unfortunately, that cannot be offset by severe failings in other areas:
1. He told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and invaded that country. The war was completely unnecessary and I would submit that the removal of a leader like Saddam Hussein laid the ground work for the rise of ISIS. Moderator cut: Trying to keep Politics our of the History forum.
2. He put the brakes on a promising field of science, stem cell research, largely because of his own conservative Christian beliefs which should have played no role in formulating public policy.
3. He pushed Medicare Part D through Congress. It was poorly conceived. It put legal prohibitions on Medicare that keeps it from negotiating drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry. That oversight is costing the Treasury literally billions of dollars per year.
4. He was on watch for eight years while this country slid into the worst recession since the Great Depression. It was largely created by deregulation of the financial services industry. Bush was not the only reason this happened, but it doesn't change the fact that he did nothing to stop it in the eight years of his presidency.
I pray we never have another President like him.
Moderator cut: Current politics is certainly off topic for the History forum.
Oh, and he left office with a 31% approval rating.
Last edited by mensaguy; 01-30-2017 at 10:01 AM..
Reason: Politics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
